Church but only their owne fancies because so it seemed necessary for their reputation and credit or some other human and priuate respect how much soeuer they pretend to be only moued by Scripture for of this they admit no more The Protestants haue no probable rule of faith nor any true faith at al. then they please and for the interpretation they haue no other rule then their owne pruate spirit or fancy which is far of from being any probable rule of truth much lesse so certaine as is necessary for the certainty of diuine and supernatural faith to be built vpon And this is the true reason why the Church of God is but one because there is but one rule of fayth from which whosoeuer falleth cannot haue any true faith at all nor belong to the true Church of God The other comparison which M. Downam vseth is much les to the purpose for it is not the Church but the Bishop of Sardis as he himselfe saith that it is agreed by In his Sermō at Lābeth pag. 2. Apoc. ◠1. Interpreters both new and old who had a name that he liued but indeed was dead neither was this death for want of faith but of charity and good workes as is manifest and though it were otherwise yet M. Downam could proue nothing by this comparison except we would belieue his bare word that the Church of Rome were in this case which is our chiefe question and M. Downams wonted figure to take it as granted Wherfore since he can argue no better let vs see how he can answere 7. To Bellarmines first reply vpon Caluins deuise that the Roman Church is not the true Church but that there VIII remaine in it only the ruines and reliques of a true Church M. Downam granteth that all visible Churches may faile and fall away but not the inuisible Church of Christ which he calleth the Catholike Church nor any one sound Christian that is of this inuisible Church In which answere he graunteth Bellarmine as much as he went about to proue that the gates of hell in his opinion haue preuailed against Christs visible Church so that in a whole thousand yeares Christ had not so much as one constant professor of his truth and though I might easily proue that Christ spake of his visible Church and that it The visible Church is to endure to the end of the world was to endure vntill the worlds end yet now I will not trouble my Reader with so needles a digression since the matter is so plaine and euident in it selfe that me thinks any man which maketh accompt of Christ his passion and glory or of his desire to saue soules and to prouide for their conuersion and faith should stop his eares not to heare so great a blasphemy vttered as M. Downam is not ashamed to affirme yet if any man haue any doubt or desire to be more fully satisfied in this point let him read Bellarmine him selfe lib. 3. de Ecclesia militant cap. 12. 13. To Bellarmines second reply M. Downam answereth that it proueth nothing except he suppose that the Church of Rome is the only true Church But he should haue answered it in forme admitted only that which Caluin auoucheth that the Papists hold the ruines of the Church and the foundations yea the buildings themselues halfe throwne downe for out of this only Bellarmine argueth and sheweth that the Protestants can neither haue the whole intire church since in their opinion it is fallen nor the part which remaineth of it since they grant The Protestants cannot haue the Church of Christ but only some new building of their own it to be amōg the Papists to which delēma M. Downā answereth not a word but only braggeth that the Church of Rome may fall yet the Catholicke Church of God may stand yea shall stand c. But he forgetteth himselfe marketh not what his Maister Caluin hath graunted that not only the Church of Rome but euen the very Church of Christ is fallen and that the Papists haue as much as is left of it cōsequētly the Protestāts can only haue some new hereticall building of their owne though M. Downam be neuer so loth to acknowledge it Neither will the example of the Church of Iuda vnder Iosias serue his turne for that was only a reformation of manners and a destruction of Idolatry without any departing from the ancient Church of God in which remained the true succession of Priests and Gods true religion after a visible manner no otherwise then if it should please his Maiesty to put downe heresie and aduance Catholike Religion in his Kingdome which were only to imbrace the true Church of Christ and not to erect any new building as the Protestants haue done as Bellarmine conuinceth 8. M. Downam hauing thus impugned Bellarmines arguments commeth to refute his solutions to their obiections and wheras Bellarmine gaue three solutions to the first See part 2. cap. 2. M. Downam passeth two of them ouer in silence telling vs that he hath taken thē away in another place which how true it is the Reader shall be iudge when we come to that encounter Now let vs see how he refuteth the second solution which Bellarmine giueth that the harlot of which S. Iohn speaketh is Rome Ethnick raigning worshiping Idols and persecuting Christians and not Rome Christian the Apoc. 17. contrary of which M. Downam neuer goeth about to proue with any new argument as he should haue done it being his turne now to argue but only contenteth himselfe to answere Bellarmines proofe which he doth also by halfes for Bellarmine proueth his exposition euidently by the authority of Tertullian S. Hierome and sheweth the impudency of heretikes that are not ashmed to alleadg those authours altogeather against their meaning to proue that S. Iohn speaketh of Rome Christian To all which M. Downam giueth him not a word but is very well content to be thus beaten so that it may not be spoken of but to the other proofe he thinketh himselfe able to say something therfore answereth two wayes 1. that though Popish Rome had not dominion ouer the Kings of the earth and were not drunke with the blould of the Saints and martyrs of Iesus yet we might vnderstand the Apostle thus that that Citty which then had dominion ouer the Kings of the earth and then persecuted the Saints is called Babylon because it was to be the seate or sea of Antichrist So that as you see M. Downam will haue Rome to be called Babylon because it was to be the seate or sea of Antichrist which he supposeth as manifest though Bellarmine in this third solution and before also in one of his arguments both which M. Downam passeth ouer in silence sheweth manifestly that Antichrist shall hate this Babylon and not make it the seat of his kingdome So that this first solution is nothing but M. Downams wonted
no other Bishops of Rome but S. Peter S. Paul For Irenaeus lib. 3. cap. 3. doth plainly affirme that the Sea of Rome was founded by S. Peter and S. Paul and that they were the first Bishops there which all the auncient Fathers which I cited before doe also testifie It is also well knowne that both Symon Magus and Nero did coÌ„tend with S. Peter and S. Paul Wherfore if the Aduersaries mislike that S. Peter and S. Paul were Antichrists and Symon Nero the true Christ they are forced to confesse that in the Apostles tyme Antichrist was not come in himselfe but only in a certayne Type of his by which meanes Beza's consequence with which he concluded that Antichrist cannot be one man vnles we could giue him one man who should liue from the Apostles tyme to the end of the world is shewed to be ridiculous To confirme this I say that S. Iohn doth speake in that manner as our Lord speaketh of Elias Matth. 17. Elias indeed shall come and restore all things and I say vnto you that Elias is already come and they did not know him that is Elias in his owne person shall come but Elias in his like is come already to wit in S. Iohn Baptist To the second Argument First it is denied that alway Daniel by particular beasts doth vnderstand seuerall Kingdomes for by one beast he doth sometymes signify one Kingdome as in the 7. Chap. where by the Lion he vnderstandeth the Kingdome of the Assyrians by the Beare the Kingdome of the Persians by the Leopard the Kingdome of the Grecians by the other beast vnnamed the Kingdome of the Romans Sometymes one King as in the 8. Chap. where by the Ram he doth vnderstand Darius the last King of the Persians by the Goate Alexander the Great Secondly I deny the consequence of his argument for S. Paul by the man of sinne doth not vnderstand any of the foure beasts described by Daniel but he vnderstandeth that little horne which as Daniel writeth preuailed against the ten hornes of the fourth beast that is that one King who from a little beginning did so increase that he subdued all the other Kings vnto him To the last Argument I answere many wayes that it may be vnderstood how impudently Caluin wrote that they do wilfully erre who do not gather out of that argument of his that the Bishop of Rome is Antichrist First by the Apostasy in S. Paul most rightly Antichrist himselfe may be vnderstood for so with common consent do the Greeke Interpreters teach S. Chrysostome Theodoretus Theophilactus and Oecumenius and besides S. Augustine lib. 20. de ciuit Dei cap. 19. and Antichrist is called the Apostasy both by the figure called Metonymia because he shal be the cause that many forsake God and also by a certaine excellency for he shal be such a notable Apostata that he may be called the Apostasy it selfe Secondly by the Apostasy may be taken the defection or falling from the Roman Empire as many of the Latins do expound as S. Ambrose Sedulius and Primasius For as in the Chapter following we will demonstrate that Antichrist shal not come before the Roman Empire doth wholy perish Thirdly if we admit that by the Apostasy is meant the defectioÌ„ or failing from the true Faith religion of Christ as Caluin doth shew we are not driuen into any straits or difficulties For it is not necessary that S. Paul speaketh of the Apostasie of many ages for he might speake of some very great and singular apostasy which shall only be in that very short time in which Antichrist shall raigne and so S. Augustine in the place before cited that is l. 20. de ciuit Dei cap. 19. writeth that this place was vnderstood of many Ancients who probablie did teach that Antichrist appearing all Heretikes or faygned ChristiaÌ„s should wholy come to him by that meanes there would be at that tyme a very great Apostasy such as neuer had bene before Fourthly if we graunt to Caluin that S. Paul speaketh of another Apostasy of many ages yet he shall get nothing For we may say that that Apostasy doth not necessarily belong vnto one body Kingdome of Antichrist nor require one head but that it is a disposition to Antichrists Kingdome that it is made in diuers places vnder diuers Kings and vpon diuers occasions as now we see that Africa is failed or reuolted to Mahomet a great part of Asia to Nestorius and â—â—â—â—â—hes and other Prouinces to other Sects Fiftly and lastly if we should graunt to Caluin that the generall Apostasy from the fayth and which endureth now many yeares is Antichrists Kingdome it would not straightway follow that the Pope is Antichrist for that question were to be handled who hath failed or reuolted from the Faith or Religion of Christ we or they that is the Catholikes or the Lutherans Though they say that we are those which haue failed notwithstanding they haue not yet proued it nor hath it bene declared by any common Iudge And truly we can farre more easily prooue that the Lutherans are those who haue failed then they prooue that the Catholikes haue failed For that they haue failed from the Church in which they were before they themselues do not deny For to let passe the rest Erasmus Sarcerius vpon that of the 2. Thessal 2. Then the wicked one shal be reuealed doth plainely confesse that almost all the predecessors of the Lutherans and he also did sometimes obey the Bishop of Rome therfore they haue fayled from the Church and Religion of their predecessors But that we haue failed from any Church neither haue they demonstrated hitherto neither will they euer be able to demonstrate Wherfore when they read in S. Paul Vnles the reuolt or Apostasy be come and the wicked one reuealed c. and thinke that they are departed from the Church in which they were and that we do perseuer alway in the same ordinaÌ„ces it is meruaile if at least they do not feare least S. Paul spake of them Out of this second head we haue the second argument to prooue that the Pope is not Antichrist For if Antichrist be only one person and there haue bene and shall be many Popes endued with the same dignity and power certainely Antichrist is to be sought els where then in the Roman Sea M. Dovvnams Ansvvere confuted 1. MAISTER Downam denieth that Antichrist shall be one particuler person and to Bellarmins first place of Scripture he answereth that in that place of S. Iohn Christ speaketh indefinitely of any false teacher which should come to the Iewes Ioan. 5. in his owne name that is not sent of God Secondly he speaketh also conditionally If another come Thirdly he speaketh of those Iewes to whom he speaketh and not of those Iewes which shal be in the end of the world In which exposition of his and especially in the first and third point he is contrary to Bellarmine Let
it hath bene euer since and so he should haue translated is in taking out of the way and then we shall easily answere to the argument See cap. 5. nu 4. that a thing in doing is not done and consequently that Antichrist is but comming and not come For the remouing of the Imperiall seate from Rome the taking of Rome by the Goths the decay of the Empire are not sufficient for M. Downam to make it good that the Empire was taken away but only that it was in taking away that is in decay not subuerted or perished And besides if M. Downam bethink himselfe well it wil be a litle with the soonest for him and his friends whome Bellarmine calleth Heretikes to affirme that Antichrist was come in S. Hieromes tyme. As for the Scriptures which M. Downam noteth it is not necessary to explicate them now since we haue had and shall haue often occasion to handle thē at large only I will aske M. Downam what he meant to say that Bellarmine thought to discredit the arguments of the Fathers by reckoning them among erroneous conceiptes since Bellarmine expresly saith that the opinions of these Fathers were suspitions and not errors because they durst not set downe any certaine tyme 2. Now then let vs come as M. Downam likewise inuiteth vs to Bellarmines heretikes where he taketh vpon him to defend all those opinions but the first of the Samosatenes whome he is content with Bellarmine to call heretikes but taketh it very ill at his handes that he would number them among Protestants which notwithstanding he hath no reason to do since Bellarmine telleth but the truth and giueth his reason why he doth so because they all agree in this that Antichrist is come and that he is the Pope which will How much the protestants agree with the Samosatenes all other heretikes be thought a greater agreement then Christ hath with the wicked which comparison it pleaseth M. Downam to vse though if others had done farre lesse he would haue bene ready to haue called it blasphemy if he be not more temperate then many of his fellow Ministers and besides he might haue considered that all the arguments which Bellarmine vseth against the Samosatenes make as much against the Protestants so that his boasting of his men which haue soundly confuted their heresies will seeme ridiculous except they had cōfuted this opinion likewise which they could not doe except they would confute themselues And the nippe which he giueth the Papists for houlding their peace will make some thinke that either he hath not read so much as the titles of Bellarmines whole bookes or els that he is very forgetfull if not malicious since it is euident that he hath not omitted those heretikes no more then the rest neither in other heresies nor in this in which he is as exact as M. Downam can desire since he telleth vs in what they differ from him his crew which is but in a nice point God knoweth to wit in the circumstances of tyme if we consider the other two mayne points in which they agree besids here M. Downā sayth that euen in the Apostles tymes Antichrist had as it were set his foote in the Church which is something before that which the Samosatenes affirme who only thinke that he appeared a little after the Apostles tyme so that all the fault will light vpon M. Downam and his fellowes who will needes make themselues so like to those and all other heretikes that none but themselues can see any other difference among them but materiall to wit that euery one choseth this or that matter in which they differ from the Catholike Church but all agree in this that they chose their Religion out of their owne priuate iudgments and spirits by which they take vpon them to explycate the Scripture euery one after his owne fashion but none of them will subiect their spirits to the spirit of truth which is according to Christs promise only in the Catholike Church and consequētly they wil be still accompted formall Heretikes till they amend this generall fault of theirs 3. Concerning the other 5. opinions which Bellarmine From X. to XVII rehearseth M. Downam would faine make an agreement by affirming that the constant opinion of the learned is that of the reuealing or manifest appearing of Antichrist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the rest is impertinent there were two principal degrees the first about the yeare 607. the second after the yeare 1000. Where first we may note how Downam nothing Scrupulous in his accompt cunningly he bringeth it in with an about and an after both which may comprehend one or more yeares And it must be no little nor nice difference which will breake any square in this mans conceipt but you must beare with him for he was inforced to inlarge his conscience and to be nothing scrupulous because otherwise he could hardly haue made any one to agree with himselfe or any other for they which come neerest differ in a yeare since Illyricus Chytraeus and Luther put that title which was giuen by Phocas The Protestants disagreement about Antichrists comming to Pope Boniface the third in the yeare 606. and not 607. as M. Downā doth who leauing his Rabbines is contēt to ioine with Bellarm. in this accompt But there is a greater difference betwixt Luther Bibliander on the one syde the Centuriators and Chytraeus on the other syde about S. Gregory whether he did belong to Christ or to Antichrist which M. Downam wisely passed ouer in silence with being content to go about And yet he must fetch a fargreater compasse to comprehend Bullenger who putteth Antichrists comming more then a 100. yeeares later then any of these so that by that word about we must vnderstand a 100. yeares sooner or later And yet the word after hath a larger scope since Musculus will haue Antichrists comming to haue byn about the yeare 1200. But M. Downam stoutly denieth that Bullenger putteth Antichrists comming the yeare 763. yet mentioneth not the place which Bellarmine citeth which is as plaine as plaine may be but thinketh it sufficient to alledge another place out of Bullenger where yet he nameth not once Antichrist but explicateth how in his opinion the Popes dominion increased was confirmed which only sheweth that Bullenger either did not thinke that Antichrists appearing the Popes dominion was all one or els that he is contrary to himselfe of which two I will giue M. Downam good leaue to choose which he listeth He would also faine excuse Musculus but that the matter is too plaine since he would found his opinion vpon S. Bernard who plainly affirmeth that he expected Antichrists appearing or reuealing and consequētly thought that he was not reuealed at that tyme so that Musculus following S. Bernard must needes thinke so too howsoeuer of his owne head he addeth that Antichrist was come which as it is foolish in
cauill for the Church of Rome if we vnderstand that particuler diocesse is still accompted but a part of the Catholike Church and in this sense a man may still be a good Christian although he be not of the Church of Rome And in ancient tymes the Church of Rome alone that is the Church of which the Bishop of Rome is the chiefe Pastor was accompted the Catholike Church And consequently that he that was not a member of that Church was not taken for a Catholike or true Christian as appeareth sufficiently by the places which Bellarmine citeth to which I will only adde one more out of S. Hierome in his Epistle to Pope Damasus I am vnited in Communion saith he to thy Blessednes that is to the Chayre of Peter I know that the Church was built vpon that rock whosoeuer eateth the Lambe out of this house is prophane if any man be not in the Arke of Noe he will perish in the deluge I know not Vitalis I refuse Those which belong not to the Church of Rome belong not to Christ but to Antichrist Meletius I esteeme not Paulinus whosoeuer gathereth not what thee scattereth that is whosoeuer belongeth not to Christ belongeth to Antichrist Now let M. Downam compare the writing of any Catholike at this tyme and see if they attribute more to the Pope or Church of Rome at this tyme then S. Hierome did at that and with all consider if in S. Hieromes iudgement it be not a playne marke of an Antichristian to be against the Roman Church and of a good Christian to be vnited to it 8. To the third obiection M. Downam answereth that the Oath which Bellarmine alleadgeth is not an Oath of obedience and allegiance to the Pope but of faith and Religion towards God conformable to the faith and Religion then professed by the Bishop and The oath of obedience made to the B. of Rome before the yeare 606. Church of Rome But by M. Downams leaue the wordes of the Bishop are these Sub meiordinis casu spondeo atque promitto tibi perte Sancto Petro Apostolorum principi atque eius Vicario Beatissimo Gregorio vel successoribus ipsius me numquā c. ad schismata reuersurū sed semper me in vnitate Sanctae Ecclesiae Catholicae communione Romani Pontificis per omnia permansurum Vnder perill of loosing my place I profer promise to thee and by thee to S. Peter Prince of the Apostles and to most blessed Gregory his Vicar or to the successors of him that I will neuer returne to schisme but will alwayes in all pointes remayne in the vnity of the holy Catholike Church and in the communion of the B. of Rome By which we see that the promise to remayme in the communion of the Pope was as absolute as that other to remayne in the vnity of the Catholike Church which I suppose M. Downam will admit to be perpetuall without limitation of any tyme. And this promise he presently cōfirmeth with an Oath by Almighty God by the 4. Ghospells which he held in his hands and by the health of Nations and of the rulers of his Common wealth Now it is a friuolous cauill to say that this Oath was taken vpon the occasion of his lapse for this Bellarmine denieth not but only affirmeth that it was taken before the comming of Antichrist according to the Protestāts accompt Neither is it to the purpose that now such Oathes are more generall and common for this Bellarmine denieth not and who seeth not that the exaction of Oaths may proceed vpon diuers occasions And if the Oath be lawfull the often exacting of it is not culpable but rather If the Oath be lawfull the often exacting of it is not culpable commendable arguing greater vigilancy in them which gouerne And the like may be said of some other clauses more expresly set downe in some other formes of oathes according to the necessity of tymes and the qualities of them who are to sweare M. Downam should shew vs that there is any oath exacted of any now that is not fit to be performed by them which thinke it necessary to liue in the communion of the Pope as this Bishop did as appeareth by his Oath wherein he promiseth as much in generall as any other can expresse in particuler for he protesteth that he will neuer be drawne from this cōmunion by any perswasions or any other meanes and consequently that he will alway remaine in the obedience of the Pope for he renounceth not any heresy as M. Downam supposeth but only schisme which he performed by returning ad vnitatem Sedis Apostolicae to the vnity of the Apostolike Sea which I hartily wish that M. Downam and his fellow Protestants may also doe for otherwise it would not be sufficient to renounce their heresies though this were a good step to that To the fourth after a fit of rayling M. Downam answereth Priestly vnction vsed before the yeare 606. Desacra vnctione c. Cum venisset at length that both the places of S. Gregory Nazianzen are to be vnderstood figuratiuely of consecration to the Ministry this he endeauoureth to proue by the testimony of Innoc. 3. by which it appeareth that this cerimony of annoynting was not vsed in the Greek Church whereof Naziāzen was but reiected as Iewish vntill he imposed the same vpon them about the yeare 1200. But M. Downam goeth beyond Innocentius for he only affirmeth that they to whom he wrote that is at the most the Grecians of his tyme were not wont to vse this cerimony of annoynting but that the Greeke Church had not vsed it before Innocentius affirmeth not and much lesse that they had reiected it as Iewish Wherefore these are M. Downams additions which we may bouldly reiect since he hath no proofe for them and consequently his figuratiue interpretation falleth to the ground and we are to take the words of S. Gregory Nazianzen as they sound especially since others as ancient as he both of the Greeke and Latin Church make expresse mention of this Cerimony as M. Downam may see in Bellarmine lib. 1. de Sacramento Ordinis cap. 12. where he also handleth this obiection out of Innocentius 3. and vrgeth it further then M. Downam Bellarmin vrgeth Downams obiection further then he doth himselfe doth whome I must intreat not to be angry though I passe ouer his rayling in silence since he saith nothing to the purpose which is not already answered for now all our question is how ancient this Cerimony is and for the lawfulnesse therof I remit him to the place of Bellarmine already alleaged where he solueth that obiection taken from the Iewes and whatsoeuer els M. Downam can inuent 10. To the fifth obiection M. Downams answere is that S. Augustine is to be vnderstood of Sacrifice of prayer and not of any propitiatory Sacrifice but by M. Downams leaue he cannot carry it so for we will appeale to S.
yet expressing it in the conclusion which is a meere cauill for Bellarmine would not add any word in the premisses which he found not in Melancthon Caluin and Illyricus whose opinion he alleadged In the conclusion which was his owne he might very well expresse that which was necessarily to be vnderstood as Bellarmin explicateth out of Caluin himselfe for M. Downams deuise that the Church of Christ The Church comprehendeth not al that professe the name of Christ may be taken for the company of Christians that is of those that professe the name of Christ is too ridiculous since by this meanes he includeth all heretikes whatsouer who are indeed the Synagogue of the Diuell so confoundeth the Church of God and the Sinagogue of the Deuill wheras S. Paul saith that Antichrist shall sit in the TeÌ„ple of God he meaneth according to M. Downams interpretation the temple of the Diuell All which is so obsurd that the authors with whom Bellarmine disputeth would haue byn ashamed of so ridiculous an assertion and therfore they sought other cuasions as we shal see forthwith but now let vs go on with the other illation that the Protestants are out of the true Church for how the Temple of Hierusalem is by S. Paul called the Temple of God we shall see afterward in the discussion of Bellarmines answeres to the arguments of the Protestants 5. Wherfore M. Downam to saue himselfe and his brethren from being out of the true Church of Christ is driuen to this exigent to deny that there is any one visible Catholike Church but only one invisible Catholike Church and many particuler visible Churches which is a most extrauagant and absurd paradox contrary both to Scriptures Fathers and Councells as Bellarmine sufficiently proueth lib. 4. de There is one visible Catholicke Church Ecclesia militant cap. 10. But now I will only oppose to this insolent madnes the authority of the Creed generally receaued of all where the Church is called One Holy Catholike and Apostolike and who seeth not that all which belong truly to Christ must agree in one faith and not to be deuided by schismes and heresies which in M. Downams conceipt can only happen in particuler Churches or at least in them only be acknowledged and rooted out So that if any particuler Church will wholy fall to either or rather if the chiefe head and pastour of any such Church shal become either schismaticall or hereticall there is not meanes left for his reduction since that he is not bound to be at vnity with other particuler Churches nor to subiect himselfe to any visible Catholike Church or to any visible head therof which is as much in effect as to say that Christ hath left no meanes vpon earth to decide controuersies concerning Faith or to take away schismes diuisions but that euery particuler Church or Pastor yea indeed euery particuler man may freely follow his owne fancies without contradiction or controlement of any so long as he can pretend any text of Scripture though neuer so much wrested and falsly vnderstood for that which he is resolued to hould And is it meruarle that heresies and schismes be so rife in our daies since these absurd paradoxes are so currant But what should heretikes and schismatikes do but defend schismes and diuisions and imâ—ugne vnity and concord which if they would admit they must of force returne to the Catholike Church whereit is only to be found Since therfore the visible Church of Christ is one and by the aduersaries confession it is the RomaÌ„ it followeth manifestly that they themselues are out of Christs Church since that they The ProtestaÌ„ts are out of the Church of Christ are out of the Roman For the other cauill which M. Downam maketh that the RomaÌ„ Church is a particuler Church is not worth the answering for euery child can tell him that the Roman Church is taken for all those which agree in faith and are vnited with the Bishop of Rome who is not only Bishop of that particuler Citty but also the head and Pastor of the whole Church which of him her Head is called the Roman Church which coÌ„tinueth the true Church of Christ as Bellarmine proueth and Melancthon Caluin and Illyricus dare not deny howsoeuer M. Downam is so impudent in his rayling consorting himselfe with a vaine Poet whose meaning notwithstanding was far better then M. Petrarcha Downams is 6. M. Downam hauing thus shufled vp the matter hitherto at length commeth to explicate himselfe more plainly and agreeth with Caluin that the Church of Rome vnder the Pope may be called the Church of God in respect both of some notes and signes of a visible Church as the administration of the Sacrament of Baptisme and the profession of the Name of Christ as also of some reliques and remainder as it were the gleanings of the inuisible Church for he doubteth not but that in the corruptest times of Popery the Lord hath reserued some who haue not receaued the marke of the beast And for explication he compareth the Church of Rome to the state of Israel vnder Ieroboam and Achab because they then retained the Sacrament of Circumcision and professed Iehoua to be their God although they worshipped him Idolatrously And euen vnder Achab the Lord had reserued 7000. who neuer bowed their knee to Baal In which comparison M. Downam insisteth wholy Downam his petitio principij vpon his wonted figure of Petitio principij and consequently all that he saith is but meere railing If he would haue said any thing to the purpose he should haue shewed two points in that example the first that the visible Church among the Iewes was altogeather ceased by that Idolatry of Israel The second that Israel departed not from the Religion which was generally houlden before but that the ancient Religion was by little and little changed to Idolatry and that those which came after separated themselues from the former and yet were the true Church With these two points M. Downam might haue made some comparison betwixt the people of Israel and the Church of Rome But since The Protestants like to Israel the Catholikes to Iuda neither of these are so but the quite contrary it will fall to M. Downam and his fellowes share to be like the people of Israel since they haue left the visible Church of which they once were as the other did and consequently the Church of Rome is like to the people of Iuda and the rest which ioyned with them since it continueth in the ancient faith generally holden throughout Christendome before there were any Protestants in the World Neither do we graunt that the Protestants haue any part of Christs Church no more then the Israelites had since they haue not any iote of true faith howsoeuer they make profession of some articles for the reason why they hould them is not the authority of God proposed by the Scriptures or the
then he hath bene since and shal be more againe hereafter in Antichrists tyme then euer he was before â—fter which he shall go into eternall destruction as S. Iohn affirmeth 7. And by this we may see that Bellarmines exposition conteyneth no absurdity at all nor can be impugned by any found ground so farre as concerneth the substance Apoc. â—3 therof for all that can be obiected against it is that it seâ—meth 〈◊〉 to explicate how Antichrist should be signifyed 〈…〉 himselfe and also by one of his heades 〈…〉 very probable that it is not Antichriâ—◠〈…〉 this deadly wound but one of the 7. Kings signified by those 7. heads who shall concurre with Antichrist in his wickednesse for that in this 13. Chapter S. Iohn speaketh of particuler Kings and not of seuerall States is manifest by that which hath bene said and shall heerafter be againe confirmed And thus we may conclude this Chapter for M. Downam replyeth not a word to Bellarmines answere to the obiection of the Magdeburgians THE SIXTENTH CHAPTER Of the Kingdome and Warres of Antichrist OF the Kingdome and Warres of Antichrist we read saith Bellarmine 4. things in the Scriptures First that Antichrist rising from a most base place shall obtayne the Kingdome of the Iewes by deceipt and craft Secondly he shall fight with 3. Kings riz of Egypt Lybia and Ethiopia and that he shall ouercome them and postesse their Kingdomes Thirdly that he shall subdue other 7. Kings and by that meanes become the Monarch of the whole world Fourthly that he shall persecute the Christians with an innumerable army through the whole world and that this is the battayle of of Gog and Magog of all which since nothing agreeth to the Pope it followeth manifestly that he can by no meanes be called Antichrist Of the first thus speaketh Dan. cap. 11. There shall stand in his place a contemptible one and Kingly honour shall not be giuen to him and he shall come secretly and shall obtayne a Kingdome in deceipt Vpon which place S. Hierome wryteth that although these words be in some sort vnderstood of Antiochus Epiphanes yet they are far more perfectly to be fulfilled in Antichrist as those things which are said of Salomon are indeed vnderstood Psal 71. of Salomon but are more perfectly fulfilled of Christ wherefore S Hierome in the same place after he had expounded this place of Antiochus following Pâ—rphery writeth thus But our men better and more rightly interprete that Antichrist shall do these things in the end of the world who is to rise of a meane nation that is of the people of the Iewes and shal be so base and obiect that the Kingly honour shall not be giuen him and he shall obtayne the Princedome by wiles and deceipts c. Where Saint Hierome signifieth that this is the common exposition of Christians for which cause also Daniel cap. 7. compareth Antichrist with a little horne viz. by reason of his base and obscure beginning And certainly this first doth in no sort agree to the Pope for we should say that the Pope was vntill the yeare 600. most obscure and of no name and that then suddainly and by deceipts he vsurped some high place But this is manifestly false For as S. Augustine epist 162. saith In the Roman Church alway flourished the Princedome of the Apostolike Chayre and S. Prosper lib. 2. de vocat gentium cap. 6. Rome by the Princedome of preisthood is made more ample by the sortresse of Religion then by the throne of power and the Councell of Calcedon epist ad Leonem affirmeth that at Rome do shine the Apostolike beames which from thence extend themselues to all and communicate their treasures with others Finally euen that Heathen writer Amianus Marcellus l. 27. writing of the schisme of Damasus and Vrsicinus saith that he doth not meruayle if men striue so earnestly for the Bishopricke of Rome since that the riches and amplitude of it are so great Of the second the same Dan. cap. 7. speaketh thus I considered the hornes and behould another little horne arose in the middest of them and three of the first hornes were pulled vp beâ—ore his face and after explicating Moreouer saith he the ten hornes are ten Kinges and another shall rise after them and he shal be more mighty then the former and shall humiliate 3. Kings And cap. 11. explicating who these three Kinges be He shall send his hand quoth he into lands and the land of Egypt shall not escape and he shall haue dominion of the treasures of gould and siluer and in all the precious things of Egypt and he shall passe also through Lybia and Ethiopia Vpon which places and especially vpon cap. 7. S. Hierome writing saith Let vs say that which all Ecclesiasticall VVriters haue deliuered In the consuÌ„mation of the world when the Kingdome of the Romans is to be destroyed there shal be ten Kinges who shall deuide the Roman world amongst them and there shall arise an eleuenth little King Antichrist who shall ouercome three of the ten Kinges that is of the Egyptians and of Africa and Ethiopia who being slaine the other 7. Kinges shall also submit themselues to the Conquerour The same doe teach of the three Kinges to be slaine by Antichrist S. Irenaeus lib. 5. Lactantius lib. 7. cap. 16. and Theodoretus in cap. 7. 11. Daniel And this most of all refuteth the madnes of heretikes who make the Pope Antichrist for let them say if they can when the Pope slew the Kinges of Egypt of Lybia and Ethiopia and vsurped their Kingdome Theodorus Bibliander in his Chronicle saith that the Pope as a little horne shaked the first horne of the ten when Gregory the second excommunicated Leo the Greeke Emperour the Image breaker and prohibited the tributes of Italy to be rendred vnto him and by little and little obteyned his Princedome that is the Exarchate of Rauenna He saith that he shaked off the secoÌ„d horne when Pope Zacharie deposed Childerichus King of the French and commaunded Pepin to be created in his steed Of the third he speaketh not plainely but he seemeth to insinuate that the third horne was then stroken of when Gregory the 7. excommunicated and deposed Henry the 4. Emperour There is also extant a certaine Epistle of Fredericus the second Emperour of that name written against the Pope in which he affirmeth that the three hornes pulled vp by Antichrist are the Kingdome of Italy Germany and Sicilie which the Pope had chiefly made to serue him But these are most vaine cauills for first Daniel speaketh not of the Kingdome of France or Germany but of the Kingdome of Egypt Lybia and Ethiopia Besides the Pope hath slaine none of those Kings but Antichrist shall kill those 3. Kings as S. Hierome saith Likewise Antichrist shall vsurpe those Kingdomes to himself and not giue them to others but the Pope kept not the Kingdome of France to himselfe but gaue it to Pepin
not plainely inough signify that he was greater then Apollo and his other coadiutours Moreouer Io. 20. it is said indeed to all the Apostles Behould I send you and whose sinnes you remit c. notwithstanding cap. 21. all the Apostles and the rest of the faithfull are subiected to S. Peter as sheep to their Pastour when it is said by our Lord to S. Peter alone in the presence of other Apostles feed my sheep Finally although Matth. 18. it be said to all the Apostles VVhatsoeuer you shall bind c. notwithstanding Matth. 16. it is said to Peter alone To thee I will giue the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen c. and without doubt our Lord would not promise him any thing singulerly vnlesse also he would giue him some singuler thing but of these we haue said many thinges before lib. 1. cap. 12. 13. 14. To that which thou obiectest of both the Swordes against the Extrauagant of Bonifacius 8. where thou also laughest at the Popes arguments I will only answere in this place that they are all taken out of S. Bernard whome Caluin Melancthon and other of your crew are wont to call an holy man and to alleadge him oftener then once See lib. 2. 4. de Consider or if thou pleasest see what we haue treated of this very matter in our last Booke de Pontifice And this shall suffice of thy Antithesis or opposition in this place Now it remayneth that we shew that this very vision of S. Iohn doth best agree to Luther and Lutherans for first it is plaine that Luther may be signifyed by that starre which fell from heauen to earth seeing that he became of a religious man a secular of a continent a marryed and of poore rich and changed his sober and slender fare with plentifull and dainty cheere For what else is this then to haue fallen from heauenly to earthly conuersation Now he that feeleth not the smoke of the bottomlesse pitte which hath ensued vpon his fall is altogeather blind and stupide for before Luther fell from the Catholike Church almost all the West was of the same faith and religion and whithersoeuer a man went he presently acknowledged his brethren for they were all in light But aâ—ter Luthers fall there arose such a smoke of Errours Sects and Schismes that now one cannot know another in the same Prouince yeâ— not in the same Citty or house This smoke hath also darkened the Sunne and the Ayre as it is said in the Apocalyps for both we and our Aduersaries do vnderstand by the Sunne Christ and by the Ayre the Scriptures by which we after a certaine sort breath in this life And truly how vehemently this smoke hath obscured Christ Transiluania and the Countreys therabout do testify where Christs Diuinity is openly denyed Germany also witnesseth where the Anabaptists plainly and the Vbiquists more obscurely deny Christs Humanity And though there were in tymes past many heretikes which did likewise impugne Christ yet none more impudently then the heretikes of our time for many of them doe not only deny Christ to be God but they adde that he cannot be inuocated nor knoweth what we do It is an horrour to heare or read with what temerity the mysteries of Christ are disputed of at this tyme. Likewise it is incredible how vehemently this smoke hath obscured the Scriptures for now there are so many Translations and Commentaryes contrary one to another that those thinges which in times past were most cleere seeme now most obscure What can be said more plainly then that which S. Paul saith 1. Corinth 7. Of Virgius I haue not the precept of our Lord but I giue counsaile And yet all the heretikes of this tyme do constantly deny that there is any counsaile of Virginity and that S. Paul meant not to giue any counsaile to imbrace Virginity in that place but rather to terrify men from it What can be more plainely spoken then that word of our Lord This is my Body and yet there is nothing more obscure at this time What should I say of those of Transiluania who haue so peruerted with their Commentaries the Ghospell of S. Iohn which is well knowne to haue bene chiefly written against Cerinthus and Ebion who denyed Christs Diuinity that they most of all proue out of it that Christ is not God Let vs come to the Locusts which went out of the smoke of the pyt Chytraeus by the Locusts vnderstandeth the Bishops Clerkes and Monkes in the Church before S. Gregoryes tyme and yet these wonderfull Locusts were not yet risen But all which S. Iohn saith of the Locusts do most aptly agree to the Lutherans and the other heretikes of this tyme. For first the Locusts are wont alway to come in great multitude and to go in flocks Prou. 30. the Locust hath no King and they all go out by their swarmes so the Lutherans properly haue not one Head because they deny that there ought to be one Head of the whole Church Notwithstanding in a very short tyme they haue increased to a huge multitude neither is it any meruaile for they haue opened the gate to all vicious men the gluttons run to them because the Lutherans haue no certaine fasts the incontinent because among them all vowes of continency are disliked and Monks Priests NuÌ„nes are permitted to marry Likewise all Apostataes because among them all Cloysters are opened and conuerted into Pallaces couetous and ambitious Princes because both Ecclesiasticall goods and persons are subiected to their power the idle and the enemies of good workes because among them only Faith is sufficient good workes are not necessary Finally all sinfull and wicked people because all necessity of confessing their sinnes and giuing account to their owne Pastour which is wont to be a very great bridle to sinners is taken away among them Hence therfore are the Locusts so multiplyed Now these Locusts are strangely described by S. Iohn for they are said to haue a mans face yea a womans the taile of scorpions the body of Locusts Likewise they weare vpon their heads a crowne as it were of gould they haue the teeth of Lions and their brest armed with an iron plate Finally they seemed to be as horses prepared to the warre and the sound of their winges was heard as the noyse of chariots running to warre and they had for King ouer them an Angell or the bottomelesse pytte who is called an Exterminatour Their smoth face signifieth the beginning of their preaching which alway beginneth from the Ghospell for they promise to say nothing but the most pure word of God so they most easily allure the simple The scorpions taile signifieth the poysoned and deadly euent for after they haue proposed the word of God they depraue it with their peruerse interpretation and in that sort as it were writhing their taile they strike in their sting and infuse their deadly poyson The Locusts body which is in a manner nothing but